Allowed

Saif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2024/7339/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant charged with abduction and forgery, noting lack of flight risk or tampering evidence despite explosive recovery allegations, subject to strict conditions regarding court appearances and prosecution proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties, subject to conditions requiring presence at trial dates and prosecution hearings.

Saif Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46744

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7339 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Saif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shesh Mani,Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

By means of the instant bail application, the applicant seeks bail in respect of Case Crime No.40 of 2024, under Sections 395, 412, 420, 465, 471 IPC and 4/5 Explosive Substance Act, relating to Police Station Jethwara, District Pratapgarh.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated. It is alleged that the applicant was not named in the FIR and as per the version made in the First Information Report, it is urged that on 27.02.2024 while the complainant after closing his medical shop was going home, on the way he was accosted by two unknown persons who at the gunpoint took away the motorcycle of the complainant and also his wallet which only had a pan card.

¶9

It is further urged that on the basis of the said First Information Report the applicant was apprehended and allegedly from the possession of the applicant, four countrymade bombs were recovered. It is also pointed out that this has been deliberately done in order to falsely implicate the applicant as there is no public witness in respect of the said recovery. Insofar as the other co-accused are concerned, it is shown that the police recovered some country made bombs and other incriminating articles from the co-accused. It is also stated that as per the recovery memo, the four countrymade bombs were in the jacket pocket, worn by the applicant, which needless to say is quite improbable. It is in the aforesaid context that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and he has been in Jail since 05.03.2024.

¶10

It is further submitted that the other than the instant case, the applicant has two other cases wherein he has been granted bail by the Sessions Court, copies of the same have been brought on

¶11

record as Annexure No.7 to the bail application.

¶12

It has also been urged that the co-accused Shubham @ Paras Saroj has been enlarged on bail by this Court by means of order dated 25.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4429/2024 and a copy thereof has been placed on record as Annexure No.5.

¶13

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of material in the case diary available with him, has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the applicant was apprehended along with the other coaccused while traveling on a stolen motorcycle and as such the applicant is not entitled to the bail.

¶14

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Saif involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶16

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶17

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial

¶20

court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 10.7.2024 Rakesh/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Shanker and Others Vs Mohd. Ibrahim and Others

Smt. Shakuntala Devi Vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Jai Prakash Singh @ Jai Prakash and Another Vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Abha Nagar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Housing and Urban Planing Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ambika Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home

Putti Lal vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Unnao and 4 Others